You know, Wirt, if the $50000 a year job were given to someone of equal
talent in the U.S. who would do it for $15000, I don't think I'd gripe. Even
if the difference in price were due to Geographic salary differences.  The
guy making $50K in Boston actually has the OPTION of moving to New Mexico
and working for $15000 (theoretically anyway)  The guy making $15000 DOES
have to spend his money on food, rent, utilities, here, so there IS benefit
to the American economy.  But, sir, the $50K person in the U.S. DOES NOT
have the option to move to India and work--JUST ASK THE INDIANS.  NO, he
can't do it.  Companies are not only denying our citizens jobs in favor of
cheap overseas labor--they are ALSO exploiting the advantages of paying NO
taxes there, supporting no infrastructure, and the high value of the
American Dollar over the foreign currency.

There is an American company here called SYKES that does outsourced call
centers HERE IN THE U.S. But they got this REAL funky M.O.  They negotiate
with local governments in depressed areas to pay for almost everything--the
building, the infrastructure, staff recruiting and training, etc etc.  The
locals usually are SO glad to get people working they sign multi year deals
(usually about 5) to PAY Sykes to be there--They pay the lease on the
building--build their parking lots--danged near ANYTHING they want.  Then at
the end of the deal--when Sykes has to start paying it's own way, THEY CLOSE
UP SHOP AND LAY OFF EVERYBODY.  Now, this is WRONG--BUT--At least for that 5
year period--the locals actually have a pay check.  They buy
groceries--HOUSES--CARS.  With our present arraignments with the Indian
Subcontractors--ZERO benefits come back to the U.S. The only profit from it
is to the stock holders of the companies and the boards of directors.  And
as we've seen with companies like ENRON and TYCO, sometimes those boards
'cook the books' and pocket the $$$ for themselves.

Again---SOMETHING'S GOTTA GIVE.  We can't all be mowing each other's grass
and doing each other's nails. Since businesses have a 90% failure rate,
"Entrepreneur" (for which they have no word in France;-) is nothing more
than a code word for DESPERATE and UNEMPLOYED for 90% of the people who try
it.

-----Original Message-----
From: Wirt Atmar [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 12:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: The White House agreeing with the sending of
jobs overseas


Shawn corrects:

> You really need to follow all that news a little more closely, one of
> the  economists in the administration made the comment and Bush
> disavowed it,  but the economist is mostly misunderstood on what he
> was trying to  say.  There are some compelling argument for free trade
> and its ability to  improve the lives on both sides of it ...

Let me correct Shawn's correction a bit. Bush hasn't disavowed the comments.
The primary complainants to the comments were the Congressional Republicans
who were very concerned with the way that the comments would play with the
constituents back home. What the White House said in response to their
reaction was that "the loss of jobs, any jobs, is regrettable," but the
White House still fully understands the benefits inherent to offshoring, if
for no other reason than they are in constant contact with the CEO's and
Chairmen of the major corporations who fill their political coffers. It's
said that a political gaffe in Washington, DC occurs when someone
accidentally tells the truth. That's what happened here.

When a $50,000/year job is transferred to an equally competent $15,000/year
person, the economy as a whole is made that much more efficient. The
offshoring movement can be described not as a mechanism that is sucking jobs
out of the country but one that is removing inherent inefficiencies.

It's important to understand what I'm saying. I wish no one any harm.
Rather, just the opposite. I wish everyone enormous happiness, health and a
long and productive life. But it's just as important to understand the world
as it is. While your congressional representatives may be prone to feed you
pablum, trade protectionism won't ultimately protect anyone. We've tried it
in the past -- and it brought on a world-wide depression and war. Free
trade, on the other hand, inherently makes the world safer and more
prosperous for everyone.

The sense I get from many of you is that you believe that you are one-trick
ponies. If "programming" as an occupation disappears in the United States,
you will be left in poverty with nothing to do. But that's certainly a
pessimistic view of your own talents. If you can do this for a living, you
should be able to do anything you set your mind to.

Wirt Atmar

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *